Rohm and Haas Company, Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Brotech Corporation

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that courts should evaluate the question of objective baselessness “in light of ... information [available] at the time of filing”
• stating that this court reviews a district court's denial of \sanctions under Rule 11 for failure to conduct an adequate prefiling investigation . . . for an abuse of discretion\
• explaining that “[pjatent litigation is complex, long, and difficult” and that parties and courts rely on “discovery procedures, partial or complete summary judgment, and evidentiary rules to narrow the issues”
• noting that a district court is not required to accept the unsupported assertions of a witness
• “Nothing in the rules or in our jurisprudence requires the fact finder to credit the unsupported assertions of an expert witness.”
• affirming district court's determination that patentee failed to prove infringement where the patentee \offered nothing more than its expert's general opinion that the accused product or process infringed the patents\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).